Carmel Natural Gas & Improvement Co. v. Small

• Citation: 150 Ind. 427,47 N.E. 11
• Parties: CARMEL NATURAL GAS & IMPROVEMENT CO. v. SMALL et al.
• Decision Date: 14 May 1897
• Court: Supreme Court of Indiana

150 Ind. 427
47 N.E. 11

CARMEL NATURAL GAS & IMPROVEMENT CO.
v.
SMALL et al.¹

Supreme Court of Indiana.

May 14, 1897.

Appeal from circuit court, Hamilton county; B. B. Stephenson, Judge.

Suit by the Carmel Natural Gas & Improvement Company against Levi J. Small and others for injunction. From a judgment in favor of defendants, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

[47 N.E. 12]

John Patty, Robert Graham, S. D. Stuart, and Gavin, Coffin & Davis, for appellant. Roberts & Vestal, for appellees.

McCABE, J.

The appellant sued the appellees to enjoin them from interfering with the plaintiff's business, or collecting any of its moneys. The appellees answered, leading to issues of fact, a trial of which resulted in a general finding by the court for the defendants, upon which the court rendered judgment that the plaintiff take nothing by its complaint. The court overruled appellant's motion for a new trial, having previously overruled the plaintiff's demurrer for want of sufficient facts to the secoud and third paragraphs of the defendants' answer. These rulings are assigned for error. The plaintiff alleges that it is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the state of Indiana, resident in the county of Hamilton, having a regularly chosen and elected board of directors, of which John A. Thomas is president, and Addison Newlin is secretary and treasurer, and is engaged in the business in its corporate name of the Carmel Natural Gas & Improvement Company, drilling wells for and supplying gas to the citizens of Carmel and vicinity, in said county. The balance of the complaint and the two affirmative answers show that the stockholders of the corporation have become divided into two factions, both factions having held at the same time rival meetings of stockholders, each meeting having elected directors for the corporation, each of which set of directors elected different presidents, secretaries, and treasurers for said corporation. A number of very interesting questions are involved, to a discussion of which the elaborate and able briefs on both sides have been devoted. If these questions are decided one way, or even one of them, then the election of directors by the stockholders adhering to the defendants was illegal and invalid, calling for a finding and a proper judgment against such defendants; otherwise the said election was legal and valid, calling for a finding and a proper judgment in favor of said defendants. In short, the whole record, evidence, and briefs of...